OWS Echoes The French Revolution.

Why? It's just another part of a pattern of nasty eliminationist rhetoric from Coulter. She likes to talk about killing people who don't agree with her ideology.

I think She was venting anger at an Ideology, that has in part declared a Jihad against Western Culture, 2 days after the worst Domestic Attack on record of our Natures History.

One thing She cannot be accused of is refusing to acknowledge the Threat against Us, by Jihad, and even Sharia.

Personally I have no issue with Anyone with the words they use when they Pray, that is between Each Individual and Their Maker, Hopefully involving Conscience. Killing People, Imprisoning them, Enslaving them, because they refuse to conform to your will, is another matter.
 
Why? It's just another part of a pattern of nasty eliminationist rhetoric from Coulter. She likes to talk about killing people who don't agree with her ideology.

I think She was venting anger at an Ideology, that has in part declared a Jihad against Western Culture, 2 days after the worst Domestic Attack on record of our Natures History.

One thing She cannot be accused of is refusing to acknowledge the Threat against Us, by Jihad, and even Sharia.

Personally I have no issue with Anyone with the words they use when they Pray, that is between Each Individual and Their Maker, Hopefully involving Conscience. Killing People, Imprisoning them, Enslaving them, because they refuse to conform to your will, is another matter.

Again, it's not a 9/11 thing. It's a continuing behavior. I cited three examples, over a span of a number of years. She runs her mouth about killing those who disagree with her. She isn't explaining a threat, she's advocating genocide against Muslims, and death to her ideological enemies. Put her words in the mouth of an imam and think about it.
 
So do liberals! That's why they love the French Revolution so much. They just can't believe someone would fight back!

Coulter is right, once again.
 
So do liberals! That's why they love the French Revolution so much. They just can't believe someone would fight back!

Coulter is right, once again.

Coulter is hardly ever right. In fact, she doesn't even try to be. Her purpose is to inflame, not to inform. And of course, to sell books.

Nor are you betraying any knowledge at all of how liberals think, which is hardly surprising.
 
Can one of Coulter's fans tell us if she's a comedian, or a serious pundit? Is she trying to be Bill Maher or George Will? Or something else altogether?
 
Since libs will make a futile attempt to debate her book, without actually ever reading her book, it is rather like jousting with the unarmed. They sit on the sidelines and imagine they say funny things.
 
Since libs will make a futile attempt to debate her book, without actually ever reading her book

That's not true, at least as far as I'm concerned. I fully intend to DISMISS her book as, considering the author, utterly unworthy of reading, and hence unworthy of debating, too. That's not because Coulter is conservative; it's because she's the literary equivalent of a troll. I really can't be bothered. I will debate only ideas and works that deserve to be taken seriously.
 
Since libs will make a futile attempt to debate her book, without actually ever reading her book, it is rather like jousting with the unarmed. They sit on the sidelines and imagine they say funny things.

"...without actually ever reading her book,..."

I've read a number of scholarly texts, and quite a few polemics from both sides of the aisle...but "Demonic" is one of the best researched and documented books I've seen.

The impromtu and extemporaneous attacks should be amusing to those of us who have studied the material. They are reduced to generic complaints and thinly-supported diatribes
that we should expect from what-passes-for-thinking from the Left.

The Left has frequently chosen the easiest path, as in attacking the messenger rather than confronting the well-evidenced analysis of Ms. Coulter.

Imagine being trained to critique a work without having read it.

In fact, she addressed that very thing:
"Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors! They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press! Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"
 
In every single work she has ever written from the beginning of her career, Ann Coulter has written so as to irritate, provoke, and annoy. She has no other purpose, except of course the underlying purpose of selling books. She is not a serious scholar; she is merely an agitator, the right-wing equivalent of Michael Moore with an opposite body type and a lot more venom and nastiness. She has never, with the possible-but-extremely-unlikely exception of her latest effort (and I say that only because I have not and almost certainly will not bother to read it, and therefore can't say from personal and specific knowledge) never written anything that was worthy of a moment's serious consideration, and all the time I have ever spent reading her was wasted time.

If you want to suggest that Demonic is an exception to the consistent pattern of worthless inflammatory drivel from this author, I'm prepared to listen to your case. But it will have to be a good one. You are arguing that it does a 180 from all of her previous works.
 
Since libs will make a futile attempt to debate her book, without actually ever reading her book, it is rather like jousting with the unarmed. They sit on the sidelines and imagine they say funny things.

"...without actually ever reading her book,..."

I've read a number of scholarly texts, and quite a few polemics from both sides of the aisle...but "Demonic" is one of the best researched and documented books I've seen.

The impromtu and extemporaneous attacks should be amusing to those of us who have studied the material. They are reduced to generic complaints and thinly-supported diatribes
that we should expect from what-passes-for-thinking from the Left.

The Left has frequently chosen the easiest path, as in attacking the messenger rather than confronting the well-evidenced analysis of Ms. Coulter.

Imagine being trained to critique a work without having read it.

In fact, she addressed that very thing:
"Let me give you a little tip: if you want liberalism to continue in this country, you have to realize that liberal students are being let down by their professors! They have liberal school teachers, and read the liberal press! Because of this weak preparation, they are unable to argue, to think beyond the first knee-jerk impulse. They can’t put together a logical thought. Now, compare that to a college Republican…"

Actually, I'm critiquing Ann. :eusa_angel: Not her books.

I've yet to find an angry bigot who was capable of good research, and Ann is one angry bigot.

You might want to research her research before you praise it. Simply providing sources doesn't mean good research.

Welcome to Illiberal Conservative Media (ICM) - by eRiposte

http://www.coulterwatch.com/files/Plagiarism Trap.pdf
 
IF I WERE A LIBERAL ...
October 26, 2011


If I were a liberal, I would have spent the last week in shock that a Democratic audience in Flint, Mich., cheered Vice President Joe Biden's description of a policeman being killed. (And if I were a liberal desperately striving to keep my job on MSNBC, I'd say the Democrats looked "hot and horny" for dead cops -- as Chris Matthews said of a Republican audience that cheered for the death penalty.)

Biden's audience whooped and applauded last week in Flint when he said that without Obama's jobs bill, police will be "outgunned and outmanned." (Wild applause!)

I suppose liberals would claim they were applauding because they believe Obama's jobs bill will prevent these murders. Which reminds me: Republicans believe the death penalty prevents murders!

Which belief bears more relationship to reality?

In a case I have previously mentioned, Kenneth McDuff was released from death row soon after the Supreme Court overturned the death penalty in 1972 and went on to murder more than a dozen people.

William Jordan and Anthony Prevatte were sentenced to death in 1974 for abducting a teacher, murdering him and stealing his car. They came under suspicion when they were caught throwing the murder weapon from the stolen vehicle in a high-speed car chase with the cops and because they were in possession of the dead man's wallet, briefcase and watch.

The Georgia Supreme Court overturned their capital sentences in an opinion by Robert H. Hall, who was appointed by Gov. Jimmy Carter.

Hall said that the death sentences had to be set aside on the idiotic grounds that the jurors had overheard the prosecutor say that the judge and state supreme court would have the opportunity to review a death sentence, which might have caused them to take their sentencing role less seriously.

(If the facts had been the reverse, the court would have overturned the death sentences on the grounds that the jurors did not take their sentencing decision seriously, under the misapprehension that no judge or court would second-guess them.)

Prevatte was later released from "life in prison" and proceeded to murder his girlfriend. Jordan escaped and has never been found.

As president, Carter appointed Hall to a federal district court.

Darryl Kemp was sentenced to death in California in 1960 for the rape and murder of Marjorie Hipperson and also convicted for raping two other women. But he sat on death row long enough -- 12 years -- for the death penalty to be declared unconstitutional. He was paroled five years later and, within four months, had raped and murdered Armida Wiltsey, a 40-year-old wife and mother.

Kemp wasn't caught at the time, so he spent the next quarter-century raping (and probably murdering) a string of women. In 2002, his DNA was matched to blood found on the fingernails of Wiltsey's dead body. Although Kemp was serving a "life sentence" for rape in a Texas prison, he was months away from being paroled when he was brought back to California for the murder of Wiltsey.

His attorney argued that he was too old for the death penalty. He lost that argument, and in 2009, Kemp was again given a capital sentence. He now sits on death row, perhaps long enough for the death penalty to be declared unconstitutional again, so he can be released to commit more rapes and murders.

Dozens and dozens of prisoners released from death row have gone on to murder again. No one knows exactly how many, but it's a lot more than the number of innocent men who have been executed in America, which, at least since 1950, is zero.

What is liberals' evidence that there will be more rapes and murders if Obama's jobs bill doesn't pass? Biden claims that, without it, there won't be enough cops to interrupt a woman being raped in her own home -- which would be an amazing bit of police work/psychic talent, if it had ever happened. (That's why Americans like guns, liberals.)

Obama's jobs bill tackles the problem of rape and murder by giving the states $30 billion ... for public school teachers.

Only $5 billion is even allotted to the police, but all we keep hearing about are the rapes and murders that Democrats are suddenly against (as long as being "against" rape and murder means funding public school teachers and not imprisoning or executing rapists and murderers).

Finally, did Flint use any money from Obama's last trillion-dollar stimulus bill to hire more police in order to prevent rape and murder? No, Flint spent its $2.2 million from the first stimulus bill on buying two electric buses.

Even if what Flint really needed was buses and not cops, for $2.2 million, the city could have bought seven brand-new diesel buses and had $100,000 left over for streetlights.

Rather than reducing the rate of rape and murder, blowing money on "green" buses is likely to increase crime, since people will be forced to spend a lot more time waiting at bus stops for those two buses.

It's going to be a long wait: The "green" buses were never delivered because the company went out of business -- despite a $1.6 million loan from the American taxpayer.

But if I were a liberal, I wouldn't acknowledge these facts, or any facts. I would close my eyes, cover my ears, demand that MSNBC fire Pat Buchanan and the FCC pull the plug on Fox, and pretend to believe that taxpayer-funded "green" projects and an ever-increasing supply of public school teachers were the only things that separated us from Armageddon.

Ann Coulter - October 26, 2011 - IF I WERE A LIBERAL ...
 
Perfect example of what I mean. Pointless, incendiary garbage designed to make people yell and stomp and stop thinking altogether.

If Coulter's new book is worth even cracking open, it will only be because it does a 180-degree turn away from that sort of crap. Does it?
 
Perfect example of what I mean. Pointless, incendiary garbage designed to make people yell and stomp and stop thinking altogether.

makes we wonder about the investment in those two paid for but undeliverable green buses they "invested" taxdollars in

coulter aside got any thoughts on that ?
 
30 billion fund and only 5 million to law enforcement ?

the vice president gave testimpny murders and rapes will go up ?

got anything on that ?
 
I've got a "pointless diversion" response for all that. To the extent it's true, it's trivial and means nothing.
 
Nobody is turned away for lack of benefits.......Unless you went to the hospital where Michelle Obama was affiliated, after she helped devise her infamous patient dumping scheme.

The ER is not health care. Try again.

The emergency room isn't health care? So what the hell is it, a pinochle tournament? Sure looked medical to ME the last time I visited.
 
Nobody is turned away for lack of benefits.......Unless you went to the hospital where Michelle Obama was affiliated, after she helped devise her infamous patient dumping scheme.

The ER is not health care. Try again.

The emergency room isn't health care? So what the hell is it, a pinochle tournament? Sure looked medical to ME the last time I visited.

You consider the Emergency Room to be a health care program? I bet they hate to see you coming. "Hi, I'm Cecilie, and I'd like my flu shot, my annual exam, tell me if I'm having allergies or if I've got a sinus infection, please refill these prescriptions, check this lump I found last Tuesday, I'm afraid it might be malignant, and don't you dare make me wait while you deal with those people with head trauma, heart attacks, mental breakdowns, and gaping, bleeding wounds before you see me." :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
The ER is not health care. Try again.

The emergency room isn't health care? So what the hell is it, a pinochle tournament? Sure looked medical to ME the last time I visited.

You consider the Emergency Room to be a health care program? I bet they hate to see you coming. "Hi, I'm Cecilie, and I'd like my flu shot, my annual exam, tell me if I'm having allergies or if I've got a sinus infection, please refill these prescriptions, check this lump I found last Tuesday, I'm afraid it might be malignant, and don't you dare make me wait while you deal with those people with head trauma, heart attacks, mental breakdowns, and gaping, bleeding wounds before you see me." :cuckoo:

You didn't say "health care program", moron. You said, "The ER is not health care" (See the bolded part of your own quote), and it sure the hell is. I suggest that you pick the frigging topic you want to discuss and stick to it, because your little attempt to move the goalposts is as good as a surrender.

Thanks for playing. Buh bye.
 

Forum List

Back
Top